Re: kern/34935: if_re_pci.c needs updating

from
[Perry E. Metzger]

Subject:

Re: kern/34935: if_re_pci.c needs updating

From:

"Perry E. Metzger"

Date:

Mon, 30 Oct 2006 01:30:02 +0000 UTC

The following reply was made to PR kern/34935; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Izumi Tsutsui <tsutsui@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: gnats-bugs@xxxxxxxxxx, kern-bug-people@xxxxxxxxxx,
gnats-admin@xxxxxxxxxx, netbsd-bugs@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: kern/34935: if_re_pci.c needs updating
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 20:22:30 -0500
Izumi Tsutsui <tsutsui@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> perry@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
>> > Please post individual bugs/fixes which you can confirm.
>>
>> I can't confirm them without doing the port, at which point why would
>> I need to post them? :)
>
> Otherwise this PR will never be closed and makes no sense, I'm afraid.
Clearly the PR makes plenty of sense. There are documented issues that
FreeBSD has fixed. Again, I can't absolutely confirm that their fixes
work without actually trying them, but I see no reason that I need to
have fixed a problem before filing a PR.
>> Clearly the fix that prevents certain versions of the card from
>> screwing up hardware assisted checksums is important.
>
> Only this? Or more other 8139C+ fixes?
> Is it a good idea to pull all fixes blindly?
I suspect that most of their fixes should be pulled "blindly" -- we
pulled their driver "blindly" after all, assuming that it was
correctly written.
> Anyway please also see recent posts on tech-kern and tech-net.
> yamt said that hw ip4csum bug only happens with
> very small packet (less than ETHER_PAD_LEN) so FreeBSD's
> fix is not right.
FreeBSD's fix is for precisely that problem.
> Furthermore, they choose to copy small packets
> to a new mbuf for padding, and several people object it.
When and if they find a better fix they can implement it.
--
Perry E. Metzger perry@xxxxxxxxxxxx